No

ID sylw: 102813

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr David Bailey

The Green Belt between Kenilworth and Coventry would be lost due to SG01 and SGG02. The Green Belt areas should not have permanent development (excepting non-permanent solar farms) otherwise this urban sprawl will join Kenilworth and Coventry and lose Kenilworth's unique sense of place.

Other

ID sylw: 102816

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Summers Holdings Ltd

Asiant : The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

The consultation itself appears to confirm that it has been overtaken by events and should be rerun at a later date taking account of responses, e.g. changes in Green Belt policy including the introduction of grey belt? This would enable, for example, detailed policy wording to be added.

Notwithstanding that, it is clear from the Councils’ own interpretation of Site 515 under the HELAA B that the site is Grey Belt and therefore its development would not be considered to be inappropriate, subject to its compliance with the Golden Rules, which the site could meet.

No

ID sylw: 102907

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Louisa Smith

Green belt should be maintained where possible.

No

ID sylw: 103002

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Howard Easton

The maps don't show HS2! The proposals destroy prime agricultural land, which the country needs to feed itself! The impact in the environment will catastrophic! The West Midlands and Warwickshire currently have the most congested roads nationally. The environmental damage will effect all human and wildlife. Finally, this plan is for 50 years. WDC, WCC won't be here in less than 3 years!!!! As I say, this is madness. Protect England's "green and pleasant" land. Don't cover it with concrete.

Yes

ID sylw: 103161

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Peter Emmerson

The Draft Policy seems to strike a reasonable balance between the importance of retaining the Green Belt and the need for considering the use of Green Belts sites where sufficient suitable land outside the Green Belt is unavailable. However, I consider that such sites should only be used in exceptional circumstances, e.g. where brown field sites in both urban and rural locations have been thoroughly considered and found to be unsuitable. "Grey field sites" within the Green Belt should always be used in preference to other Green Belt sites, unless there are overwhelming reasons against this.

No

ID sylw: 103181

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Chesterton and Kingston Parish Meeting

Green belt should be preserved as Green Belt and not used to develop new settlements or strategic growth locations.

No

ID sylw: 103257

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Jenny Stevens

Brownfield should always be used first-we've got an epidemic of mental and physical health conditions-don't build on areas that people walk and take leisure time on please. Clopton Quarter borders the Welcome Hills and Clopton Park nature reserve-and sanctuary for wildlife and people

Other

ID sylw: 103304

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Summers Family

Asiant : The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

The consultation report appears to be saying the consultation has been overtaken by events and should be rerun at a later date taking account of responses? This would enable, for example, detailed policy wording to be added.

Notwithstanding that, it is clear that an analysis of the purposes of Green Belt for the land identified at Elmhurst Farm for potential development under Site 518 in the HELAA B analysis would confirm that the site is Grey Belt and therefore its development would not be considered to be inappropriate.

Yes

ID sylw: 103334

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Stephen Norrie

The name "green belt" is deceptive, as it is not particularly a climate or biodiversity-inspired designation, and there may be good reasons to build in the green belt.

No

ID sylw: 103413

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Christine Easton

The green belt was set up to sanctify and protect society from urban sprawl. Leave it alone. Once it's gone it's gone. For ever! Imagine a world without trees and grassand all the respective wildlife.

No

ID sylw: 103441

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Laura Turner

Green belt land is to be preserved - essential for farming, wildlife, climate control, mental health. The UK Green belt was designated to give it special status - such vast housing plans are out of all proportion

Yes

ID sylw: 103452

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Neal Appleton

Agree. However, the five principles as laid out are more generally applicable. Settlement design and planning should aim to deliver those principles in any case.

No

ID sylw: 103568

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Laura Nicholas

I do not agree with the use of green belt sites being used for delevelopment. Green spaces are vital for the environment, human wellbeing, natural resources, exercise, fresh air. Increasingly in Cubbington and around Leamington our green spaces are becoming fewer and this can only have a negative impact in the years to come. Green belt should be left alone and removed from development plans.

No

ID sylw: 103574

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Carol Jones

There are sufficient non-green belt sites within the plan which would meet the remaining housing need, without removing any green belt. All brownfield sites should be used.

The quality of greenbelt should be assessed with consideration of HS2. Where the route is positioned and the existing destruction that has already occurred. Green belt in SG04 is presented as less valuable than that in SG01. Even though green belt in SG01 has been destroyed by HS2, whilst green belt in SG04 has not been developed and consists of open countryside with views of Kenilworth Castle beyond.

No

ID sylw: 103616

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr ian shenton

Green belt that is productive should ever be considered.

Yes

ID sylw: 103654

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Philip Wall

We must protect Green belt at all costs, and where this is considered we must make sure that the detriment of removal of greenbelt and prime agricultural land (in a time of concern over food security) must be accurately assessed. This is not just a financial equation.

No

ID sylw: 103678

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Philip Wall

Development should prioritise brownfield sites over Green Belt land. Urban and previously developed areas already have infrastructure in place, reducing pressure on roads, schools, and healthcare. These sites are closer to transport links and jobs, making them more sustainable. This site is particularly attractive due to its proximity to significant housing and industrial development, concentrating construction in a single area and minimising the impact on other locations. With 461Ha available, it offers substantial capacity for growth. Using brownfield land prevents environmental damage, protects biodiversity, and preserves historic landscapes while ensuring responsible, sustainable development without harming the countryside.

Yes

ID sylw: 103752

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Deborah Carter

By prioritising sustainable, non-Green Belt sites, housing can be delivered responsibly—without destroying the countryside, harming biodiversity, or overwhelming local services.

No

ID sylw: 103895

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Amarjit Gill

The green belt should be protected where suitable alternative brownfield sites exist and to prevent urban sprawl. Local transport links and congestion should always be considered

No

ID sylw: 104066

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Sheri Cosnett

This does not meet your exceptional reasons because there are suitable alternatives that do not require the use of the greenbelt

No

ID sylw: 104133

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Ian Cosnett

I think its utterly ridiculous that you cant get planning permission to put up a fence that faces the road in Hatton, but its OK to create a policy that allows thousands of un-needed and unwanted homes on the opposite.

No

ID sylw: 104173

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Kenneth Chitty

The proposed policy appears to cut through the reasons for the green belt existing and would lead to conurbations being joined at the hip. This requirement to eat into the green belt can be avoided by building the right sort of high density housing. If 28k dwellings are required this does not necessarily mean 28k separate dwellings. The recent introduction of "Grey Belt" designation is not currently addressed.

No

ID sylw: 104193

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Rachel Pope

As outlined previously, this Policy Direction is flawed due to its reliance on Paragraph 142 of the old NPPF. This provided scope for authorities to take into account “the need to promote sustainable patterns of development”. It was removed in July 2024.

The current NPPF makes no provision for 'sustainability' being the determining factor for whether green belt land can be used over non-green belt land. The legacy policy (old paragraph 142) is present in the Spatial Growth Strategy and in the Draft Policy Direction 7. It will therefore misleadingly inform the preferred option unless corrective action is taken.

No

ID sylw: 104308

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Peter Sinclair

Green belt land should be protected and used only in extremely exceptional circumstances after brownfield sites, with significant scrutiny and justification.
Quality of green belt land should be reviewed (in addition to preventing urban sprawl) for biodiversity and impact on the landscape

No

ID sylw: 104335

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Sharon Ward

Greenbelt land in SG04 must never be included in housing growth plans. It protects the countryside, preserves vital gaps between the communities of Kenilworth, Leek Wootton, Beausale, and Warwick; and safeguards wildlife habitats. Building on greenbelt would permanently damage the area’s rural character, destroy historic views, and harm much-loved footpaths leading to local landmarks like Kenilworth Castle. It would also increase traffic on narrow rural roads, threatening the safety of cyclists on the National Cycle Route. Once lost, greenbelt cannot be replaced — protecting it is essential for maintaining local identity, environmental health, and quality of life for future generations.

No

ID sylw: 104342

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Dr Nicola Sawle

infrigement into the green belt as suggested by use of sites in Henley, wood end and tanworth contradict the transport and industry development strategic plans of the SWLP. There should be strong support to protect the northern belt area which is an area of enhanced and environmental asset.

Other

ID sylw: 104364

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: South Warwickshire Foundation trust

There is no mention in the draft policy section on the value placed on biodiversity and how this plays a role in the prioritisation of the green belt areas to be developed.

We would want assurance for any of the “insetting” that is described for existing villages within Green Belt land, that this change would not have a detrimental impact on the health and wellbeing of the existing residents.

Other

ID sylw: 104413

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr ROLAND CHERRY

Green belt has done a great job of preventing urban sprawl. These lungs of countryside are an important part of the English landscape. As a general rule it must be sacrosanct, but sensible improvements to both infrastructure and infill development must be limited to those projects that fulfil a glaring need and no more. Once again, it is the improvement in biodiversity and wildlife conservation that is key to a healthy green belt so it can continue to serve a valuable service for the preservation of our treasured landscape.

No

ID sylw: 104491

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Mary Harman

This policy direction is ambiguous and is not clear on upholding historic Green Belt protections. It is written so Green Belt can be overriden, cancelled at any time it seeks to justify it. It is therefore not transparent as to the meaning of Green Belt protection and ties in with the complete u-turn on historic protection of Green Belt and historic villages to ill thought through proposals to consider mass development, not only on Green Belt land but right by and merging of Historic villages to meet urbinization.

No

ID sylw: 104531

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Nickie Charles

The plan should not include building on the green belt which is unsustainable. No consideration has been given in these plans to the impact of HS2 on the green belt which is especially relevant to Kenilworth. It has had a huge impact which makes it important that more green belt is not lost. Building on the green belt is not sustainable and no sustainability review has been undertaken. The houses required could be built without touching the green belt if the plan ran for 15 years.
If the green belt is built on we lose biodiversity and food producing land.